"How I turned a Torres Hat Trick into a criticism of Rafa" By Chris Bascombe

[Strontium]

He has mates?

 

 

He certainly has mates among the moderators on this forum.

 

Every time the "bascombe = lord haw haw" thread tag appears, it is quickly and quietly deleted, even though it is (a) funny and (b) accurate.

 

So certainly there is a faction here that wishes to insulate him against criticism. I don't know who it is because they do it under cover of anonymity.

[redrosetints]

"Keane scored 4. Shame you never played them together Rafa"

 

Even Rashid would wince at that one.

 

Hammy, i said this last week (I think it was last week), its clear, from his 'lets cut the owners some slack' article, that now Parry and Xabi are gone the new lines of attack are going to be about siding with the owners over Rafa. This article does nothing to disprove that.

 

Bascombe is now just embarrassing himself.

[redrosetints]

He certainly has mates among the moderators on this forum.

 

Every time the "bascombe = lord haw haw" thread tag appears, it is quickly and quietly deleted, even though it is (a) funny and (b) accurate.

 

So certainly there is a faction here that wishes to insulate him against criticism. I don't know who it is because they do it under cover of anonymity.

 

Absolutley, because there is a faction on here who think he is right and agree with him. His only problem is that he now seems to be siding with the owners, waiting to pounce on Rafa, as that is the only line of attack he has left. he can't complain about how were doing on the pitch, I mean, who cares about the pitch and how well we do, when that fat spanish waiter is in charge !

[Count Morfeo]

I'm just wondering why isn't in the match report?

 

McCarthy's his boss don't forget, I'd imagine what goes on the back page isn't much to do with the writers, more the editor and sub editors.

 

And "paraphrasing slightly" isn't the best basis for the usual witchhunt ;)

 

You're right. Most write offs on the front and back pages of newspapers have little to do with the writer given the byline.

[RedinSweden]

[goatboy59]

You're right. Most write offs on the front and back pages of newspapers have little to do with the writer given the byline.

Wasting your time mate. The feeding frenzy is in full swing and nothing will stop it.

[elvis]

Wasting your time mate. The feeding frenzy is in full swing and nothing will stop it.

 

But still the question remains, why go there in the first place assuming he has any pride of course ?

[hamstrung]

Wasting your time mate. The feeding frenzy is in full swing and nothing will stop it.

 

If he didn't write it, fair enough. My intent in starting the thread wasn't the usual nonsense. I thought the piece was snidey, stupid and worthy of comment (as you admitted earlier I think - the snide bit).

 

If some twat in my work put shite like that in my name, I'd not be happy.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

You're right. Most write offs on the front and back pages of newspapers have little to do with the writer given the byline.

 

Yeah, they do. At the very least, they are responsible for what is written.

[Red Nick]

Wasting your time mate. The feeding frenzy is in full swing and nothing will stop it.

 

You miss the point here

 

your friend has become an unprofessional and very poor journalist who has lost all sense of objectivity which has to be the number one trait of a good Journalist.

 

Its very sad to see a good journalist go to pot.

[RedKnight]

Seeing as the Count is a bona fide undead newspaper man, I think he knows more than most.

[Rex Banner]

 

UGH! What a shit hole paper, "anything you can do, I can do better" like fuck he can. Why would you have that as your first line when everyone with any sense knows Torres is on another level to Keane.

[RedinSweden]

Seeing as the Count is a bona fide undead newspaper man, I think he knows more than most.

 

Indeed. However, he knew he would be letting himself in for this sort of thing when he joined the NOTW. It says his name on the article and people are going to think he wrote it. Not that i understand quite why people get so worked up about it.

[RedKnight]

Indeed. However, he knew he would be letting himself in for this sort of thing when he joined the NOTW. It says his name on the article and people are going to think he wrote it. Not that i understand quite why people get so worked up about it.

 

I'm not getting into the NOTW/Basco stuff. I'm just saying that if the Count says that, I'd take him at his word. Same for Goatboy, someone who's writing on us, I've enjoyed for years.

[Dr.Filth]

UGH! What a shit hole paper, "anything you can do, I can do better" like fuck he can. Why would you have that as your first line when everyone with any sense knows Torres is on another level to Keane.

 

Read the last line more carefully mate.

 

Quality that, RiS.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

It says his name on the article and people are going to think he wrote it.

 

People are talking as if he definitely didn't write it. That's not the case. It might, just might, have been edited or added to. However, he would have written, at the very least, some of the article, if not all of it.

[RedinSweden]

Read the last line more carefully mate.

 

Quality that, RiS.

 

It's my amazing mspaint skills again. Seamless integration of new text. I'm not surprised he didn't notice.

[Red Nick]

Indeed. However, he knew he would be letting himself in for this sort of thing when he joined the NOTW. It says his name on the article and people are going to think he wrote it. Not that i understand quite why people get so worked up about it.

 

If he wrote that one line or not isnt that important in the scheme of things its about the poor quality of his work and lack of objectivity bringing the debate down to did he write a line or not is only detracting from the point that as he did with Houllier he is letting his hatred of Rafa affect the quality and objectivity of his work. As I posted earlier in the thread Houllier was dead man walking but Rafa is here for as long as he wants to be here.

[goatboy59]

I think there is a justifiable argument about trust and tabloids to be had, but I think it's been done to death elsewhere.

 

I once suggested a headline for something I'd written and the paper (a) used their own headline which (even if I do say so) was worse than mine (b) put my headline as the first line of the column! You write and send it, hopefully they don't mess it up but as others say it's the NOTW, what can be reasonably expected?

 

Hamstrung was quite right to deplore the snidiness of what he'd seen, but once other people who know better say it probably had nothing to do with Chris then just let it fucking go and nail him for what you can if you really have to.

 

I know him, I can't put the lad I meet and speak with alongside the agenda drive foaming at the mouth psychopath being portrayed on this and other forums.

 

But I do feel it's a waste of time to say otherwise now. Remember that bit where Joe Pesci gatecrashes De Niro's casino and abuses the dealers, they each in turn clap hands and get the hell out of there to let some other poor twat deal with him?

 

*Claps hands*

[dave u]

People are talking as if he definitely didn't write it. That's not the case. It might, just might, have been edited or added to. However, he would have written, at the very least, some of the article, if not all of it.

 

He definitely didn't write it, I've asked him. He didn't write any of it, only the match report and the article about Gillett. As the Count said, the front and back page write offs are hardly ever written by the reporter, and that was the case here.

[hamstrung]

He definitely didn't write it, I've asked him. He didn't write any of it, only the match report and the article about Gillett. As the Count said, the front and back page write offs are hardly ever written by the reporter, and that was the case here.

 

Does that not piss him off? It would me.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

He definitely didn't write it, I've asked him. He didn't write any of it

 

So he didn't write a word of it? Not a single word of the article that they've put his name to?

 

If that is the case, that's fine and I retract anything I've said about him in connection with that piece. Having never worked for The News of the World or The Sun, I don't know their common practices, but I would be surprised if he hadn't written any of it.

 

As the Count said, the front and back page write offs are hardly ever written by the reporter, and that was the case here.

 

The NOTW might, but I've certainly never had it happen to me. Edited, sure, but never putting my name to an article that I didn't write a word of.

 

My point still stands that anything he allows his name to be associated with is his responsibility.

 

Does that not piss him off? It would me.

 

Piss me off? I would've gone postal.

[PaulMcC]

If they're making up articles and putting his name to it, he should quit.

 

I used to like him at the Echo but his articles are crap now.

[goatboy59]

they each in turn clap hands and get the hell out of there to let some other poor twat deal with him?

 

*Claps hands*

5 seconds later

 

He definitely didn't write it, I've asked him. He didn't write any of it, only the match report and the article about Gillett. As the Count said, the front and back page write offs are hardly ever written by the reporter, and that was the case here.

 

Ha!

[dave u]

So he didn't write a word of it? Not a single word of the article that they've put his name to?

 

If that is the case, that's fine and I retract anything I've said about him in connection with that piece. Having never worked for The News of the World or The Sun, I don't know their common practices, but I would be surprised if he hadn't written any of it.

 

Well put it this way, he didn't even know Keane had scored four until Sunday morning, so anything mentioning Keane and comparing it with Torres etc was nothing to do with him. The first he knew of that spread was when I asked him about it. He wrote the report, and the piece on Gillett, and that was it.

 

My point still stands that anything he allows his name to be associated with is his responsibility.

 

I agree, and I usually stay out of these threads. The only reason I've said anything here is that I know all of that Robbie Keane garbage was nothing to do with him, and he gets enough stick for what he does write without getting slaughtered for something he hasn't written.